UK breakfast of beans on toast?

Now that really is offensive.
I have never seen or eaten beans on toast for breakfast.
Now, some B and Bs and greasy spoons offer beans as part of the fry-up but never on their own.

BTW, have you seen this website?

It is called "2 eggs, sausage, beans, tomatoes,
2 toast, large tea, cheerslove!"
and its URL is http://cheerslove.org/

Talking of teeth. I read that because dental hygiene has improved so much over recent years, it is getting difficult to identify corpses through dental records.
Also, one reason that British dentists are under stress is that old biddies like me who lived through sweet rationing, still have their teeth.
I suppose that a generation ago, I wouldn't have needed check-ups. I'd have kept my teeth in a glass by the bed.

willit...

No sour grapes on my part...I was tryi8ng to explain the view point of one of the few Americans who has some understanding of the game (at least give me that credit) and also some facts.

The fact is, and I agree to some extent these ratings are farcical, at the time of the seeding, the USA was ranked 5th by FIFA and Mexico 6th...the USA had just won the North American Central American confederation with the most points and had beaten Mexico resoundingly in their last game before the World Cup. How in heaven's name could the Mexicans be seeded and the Americans not..FIFA's own rankings showed that was a sham. Of course could it be that they were more interested in seeing Mexico advance than the USA..after all even if the USA went to the semi finals, interest in the USA would be minimal. You know that and I know that too.

But USA soccer federation is saying nothing to disturb FIFA. Why? Well South Africa may not be able to pull off getting all its sites for World Cup 2010 and guess who has made it clear they are ready to step in and make their facilities available.

Again, I'm not saying it's a conspiracy but it's human nature. A referee knows that if he makes a bad call against the USA he is not going to be bombarded with death threats as the Swiss referee who disallowed the English goal against Portugal in the 90th minute of the Euro championship (a horrible call BTW) did...remember that.

And please, do you really think that if an Italian had "fouled" (what a laugh that was) an Aussie in the 95th minute of a 0-0 tie a penalty would have been called?

Yes I know politics plays a role in every sport and I want to emphasize again I don't think the USA played very well especially in the Czech Republic game and that put them behind the 8 ball but teams like the Ukraine recovered.

This tournament is all about money and making sure the teams where soccer interest is highest are given every opportunity to get through....it is no coincidence, at least IMHO that 6 of the 8 quarter finalists are from Europe and the 2 remaining are the South American powers.

And again, the rules have to be changed. The referee should not have the power to all but award a team a goal in a game where probably only 2 or 3 goals are being scored.

Many years ago, the NASL came up with an interesting variant patterned after a penalty shot in hockey (it was used to break ties) but it put some skill into it...in that variation a player started from 35 yards out and was given 5 seconds to come in on the goalkeeper and try to score...at least the goalkeeper and the player had a chance to exhibit skills....a penalty kick is not skill, it is luck...if the goalkeeper guesses right or if the player flubs the shot, sometimes a penalty is stopped...it is luck when it happens....99% of the time a penalty kick results in a goal and just tell me how the penalty kick awarded to Italy against Australia or the one awarded to Ghana against the US made any sense whatsoever.

And that is why the game will never sell in the USA.

You all deserve a reply to your posts, so here goes….

Walkingaround - yes things have been pretty fraught here - trying to plan what to do when a major railway station and everything within a 250 yard radius blows up isn't exactly a soothing occupation. Not to mention dealing with the large number of people we had to turf out of their homes (including several very difficult people from the various homeless hostels nearby). Thankfully it's all over now.
And I would make quite an unconvincing Princess of Hearts.

Poohgirl - No problem (although I did have you in the gang of baddies). I am too much of a gentleman to point out that "poohgirl" in England would be a *specialist* magazine or website.

Sheila - I'm not racist against the Scots, otherwise I'd have to beat myself up every other day. What I can't be doing with is the victim culture north of the border that refuses to accept that the problems in Scottish society are of Scotland's making - the English are not sneaking out at night and getting the whole of Clydeside whacked out on jellies or banging on about King bloody Billy.

Scotland is a deeply damaged place and until it is prepared to admit that all is not for the best in all possible worlds up there, it will continue to suffer. More to the point until it addresses these deep seated problems it will continue to export it's brightest and best, perpetuating the problem.

The reason that I'm off is that if I make these points I am simply jumped on by people who spent a weekend in a B&B in Gretna Green telling me that Scotland is wonderful. Frankly I can't be arsed with it anymore.

Geordie: I think there is a problem in that the yanks can't handle the way the brits/irish/ aussies go about making their point. They think everyone should walk on eggshells and not voice an opinion that varies from the party line (this is why they all end up in tourists traps when they come over here - they don't do cynical, which is charming in it's own way). However the bottom line is I'm a Brit and after eight years (I counted last night) of non stop Pollyanna's I've had enough. I'm not going to change and they have an endless supply of school-mistressy bints to nag me. You've got to know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em.

Btilke: You make my points more eloquently than I ever could - you've won. Well done.

Now you can get back to the soccer...

xyz123 good points. My immediate reaction to the Italian penalty was that it was a good call, but I soon realised it was a blatant dive when I saw the replays. Australia lost out because they failed to press home their man advantage (After another dubious sending off).

I agree about South Africa (My brother works for a football magazine in Cape Town) but think politically FIFA will go out of it's way to bend the rules to allow it to go ahead. South Africa does have several Rugby stadia that can accomodate 40,000+, so if no decision can be made regarding a new stadium in Cape Town, then they would probably use the Rugby ground in Newlands.

And I thought you had disappeared because you needed to get back to work. :)

Personally, I like reading your posts because of your striking way of using nouns and verbs. Very educational.

<<.an endless supply of school-mistressy bints to nag me..>>

Hahaha!!! SOOO well put!!!

:-)

BTilke - thanks for your support, not necessary, but appreciated. I doubt that anyone on here is any more thick-skinned than I. The invitation to debate Mr. West in private, has been respectfully declined. We each have our own opinion & I doubt that any further discussion would merit much change from either party. If Portugal had their entire squad I believe the English would be in trouble. I still think the SA teams are the best of the lot. As in any sport, once persons of interest get their hands on how to arrange things (seedings & the like). It certainly removes, or at least diminshes, the game itself. It is easy to see how there have been several scandals w/officials fixing games based on what I've seen to date in the World Cup. Best of luck to those remaining.

I have realised how very little I am going to miss all this.

I'lll miss the banter with the humans, but the loss of the endless humourless droning of the Borg will be a great consolation.

Go on San paris - prove me wrong. Tell us a joke. You too Btilke.

Yeah - obviously the matches have been manipulated all over! In fact it has been decided upon which team is going to be World Champion far in advance and before the World Cup even began. It is especially clear that the US team was expelled upon a devious little scheme! Of course, their leave has nothing to do with their inability to win a single match - even while they had a majority on the pitch for quite a while. It also has nothing to do with their inability to score more than only one goal (apart from the own goal scored by Italy in their favour). It also has nothing to do with Eddie Pope's idiotic foul that forced the ref to send him off just 2 minutes after half time.
It is also quite obvious that the African market provides for much bigger revenue for the FIFA and other football associations than the U.S. market which is the sole reason for Dr. Markus Merk's indeed appalling officiation and the advance of Ghana rather than that of the U.S.

While there have been a number of calls by referees that probably were not that good (and Graham Poll's performance is rather charming compared to the smug behaviour of Dr. Markus Merk), the overall performance of the referees during the World Cup is still average IMHO. willit's remark about his/her "immediate reaction to the Italian penalty [having been] that it was a good call, but [...] soon realis[ing] it was a blatant dive when [seeing] the replays" actually sums it up best: One often needs a replay to discover the ref was wrong! Easy to wisecrack then, I should think.

I don't need to, you're already here...

Yikes, I had no idea what my "handle" meant in the UK. I chose it because it was a nickname from a former boyfriend. I love Winnie the Pooh, so he affectionately calls me Poohgirl. Sometimes when he sent me flowers the florist would write "I love you Poo Girl." I didn't like that spelling!

SAn Paris,

I did not necessarily address this to you - but then if you wish...

I was responding to Mr. Wests' request...

My comments about the officiating were not specific to any one team or country, nor were they intended to be. Many outcomes could have been changed if a certain call was (or was not) made. The second goal in the Brazil?Ghana game near the end of the first half comes too mind. The eventual goal scorer was clearly offside and they go up 2-0 at the 45th minute. Ghana had been playing quite well to that point. There are a host of others, but that one I saw first hand & called even before the replay...

Give it up San Paris - you've won. You've driven me out after eight happy years.

BTW see how many posts are in support of you rather than me....

I don't believe I resorted to 'begging' for support, threatening to leave, etc., etc. I'm sure you'll be back, tomorrow at the latest. I, however, will not be, as I am soon headed to the Mts. for the next week or so. Ta, Ta.

SAnParis,

o.k. - that was misleading.

Still, even while Brazil's second goal may have been scored favoured by a dubious call, they were already ahead by one. And they scored yet another one - and as such Ghana's loss cannot be attributed to one sole decision.

These things are just part of football - as in life, shit happens as they say.

hsv - I agree, but there seems to be a lot of it swirling around the World Cup, which is unfortunate. Hopefully the remainder of the matches, leave little doubt as to whom the best team really is...

While Brazil did score a third goal, it can be argued that the second goal was pivotal. Anybody who has played the game knows that once you go two goals in arrears(or ahead), your entire game plan changes.

Was Brazil a better team? Sure, but on this day Ghana was closing the gap with their desire (while Brazil was lacking a bit) and the game would have been a lot more entertaining for 90 minutes without the missed call.

But ... such is life and soccer/football.

hsv...

There is no overt conspiracy against any team...much of it is subtle and based on political and financial considerations such as the unjust seeding of the USA as opposed to Mexico but let me make it very clear, in no way do I think the USA played anything but putridly in the World Cup and for the most part got what it deserved based on its play; but the point here is why doesn't anybody in the USA care about the World Cup and believe me, few do so I guess it's mutual.

BTW, in the opinion of most, England has been pretty putrid too (that's what I get from reading the English newspapers) but got a fortunate draw to help them through...winning the whole thing will require them to play much better but you can only do what you have been asked to do and it is certainly not the fault of the English players they got a very soft draw and took advantage of it.

As far as the final point, do you or anybody else really believe that if an Italian had committed the same exact foul against an Aussie in extra time of a scoreless draw, a referee would have dared to call a penalty? Give me a break.

And we see the idiotic clown of a referee from Germany who called that penalty in the Ghana USA game was rewarded for his incompetence by passing into the final group of referees.

I'm sorry if you think there is any sour grapes in my commentary but as with all sports events in this day and age, luck more than skill is ultimately what decides championships. It's just that it seems that luck plays a greater role in this tournament than most others.